Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Level 2”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2026

ResStock Measure Documentation: Efficient Electric Vehicle Adoption With Level 2 Charging and Demand Flexibility

This report is part of a series describing different ResStock measures. "Measures" refers to energy efficiency retrofits that can be applied to buildings during modeling. This documentation covers the "Efficient Electric Vehicle Adoption With Level 2 Charging and Demand Flexibility" measure upgrade methodology and briefly discusses key results.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2024

Level 2 Milestone: Develop and Incorporate Novel Code Verification of Fundamental Equations in Gemma and Set Up Appropriate Tests

For computational physics simulations, code verification plays a major role in establishing the credibility of the results by assessing the correctness of the implementation of the underlying numerical methods. In computational electromagnetics, surface integral equations, such as the method-of-moments implementations of the electric-, magnetic-, and combinedfield integral equations, are frequently used to solve Maxwell’s equations on the surfaces of electromagnetic scatterers. These electromagnetic surface integral equations yield many code-verification challenges due to the various sources of numerical error and their possible interactions. In this report, we provide approaches to separately measure the numerical errors arising from these different error sources. We demonstrate the effectiveness of these approaches in Gemma.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Completion of Level 2 FY25 milestone #9193

Future laser facilities, such as the National Ignition Facility (NIF) Enhanced Yield Capability (EYC) upgrade, or entirely new facilities (often referred to as a “Next Generation” laser facilities), will drive inertial confinement fusion (ICF) targets with higher laser energies and total laser drive powers than those currently accessible at the NIF. One of the primary concerns is the loss of driver energy or symmetry control due to unwanted laser-plasma interactions (LPIs) that can backscatter, divert, or otherwise redistribute laser drive in a deleterious manner, or pre-heat the capsule ablator or fuel through the generation of hot electrons.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) Study for Vernon County, Wisconsin [Slides]

Viroqua is a town in Wisconsin with a population of approximately 4,500. The Vernon County Energy district is a local nonprofit in Viroqua that provides energy education, individualized energy consulting and coaching to residents and businesses. They have a very good relationship with our county government and wish to support their efforts. The Vernon County government is currently working on a comprehensive plan and would like to include planning for electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure in the plan. They are seeking guidance on logical phases for implementation and identifying the best locations for Level 2 and Level 3 EV chargers. NREL provided technical input on strategic planning for electric vehicle (EV) adoption and electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) expansion in Vernon County through the Clean Energy to Communities (C2C) Expert Match technical assistance program. NREL provided strategic planning support for EV expansion planning in Vernon County and siting considerations for locating EVSE.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Pump House in East River Watershed, Colorado 2019-2024

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Pump House at Mount Crested Butte in the East River Watershed. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format ER-X-Y, where ER refers to East River, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, ER-PHS, ER-LMC, ER-LMF, and ER-SMN are associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and ER-RBTn (upslope n=1) are sampling transects during the 2019 Rootball Campaign. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Trail Creek in Taylor River Watershed, Colorado 2024-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Trail Creek. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format TR-X-Y, where TR refers to Trail Creek, X is the treatment block identifier, and Y is the location identifier. Specifically, TR-ASCC1 is the control treatment block under the Adaptive Silviculture for Climate Change (ASCC) project, and TR-ASCC2 is the clear-cut treatment block. TR-ASCC-EHSn is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and TR-ASCC-ERTn (upslope n=1) are ecohydrology sites along the electrical resistivity tomography transects. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv, and the data from the soil sensors will be included in a future data version when the observation period becomes sufficiently long for data analysis. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the two sampling methods – (1) intact cores or (2) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. The intact cores were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Snodgrass Mountain in East River Watershed, Colorado 2020-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors at Snodgrass Mountain. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format SG-X-Y, where SG refers to Snodgrass Mountain, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, SG-EHS is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and SG-ERTn (upslope n=1) are points along the Snodgrass electrical resistivity tomography transect not associated with the existing site names in the directory. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Comparisons of the v11.1 Orbiting Carbon Observatory‐2 (OCO‐2) X CO2 Measurements With GGG2020 TCCON

The Orbiting Carbon Observatory 2 (OCO-2) is NASA's first Earth observation satellite mission dedicated to studying the sources and sinks of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) on a global scale. The observations of reflected sunlight are inverted in a retrieval algorithm to produce estimates of the dry air mole-fractions of CO 2 (X CO2 ). The OCO-2 Level 2 data release, version 11.1 (v11.1) retrievals from the Atmospheric Carbon Observations from Space (ACOS) algorithm, includes significant improvements in the X CO2 data product compared to older OCO-2 data versions. This work compares the v11.1 X CO2 from OCO-2 against X CO2 estimates collected from a global ground-based network known as the Total Carbon Column Observing Network (TCCON), OCO-2's primary validation source. The OCO-2 project provides a version of the Level 2 data product, called “lite” files that include calibrated and bias-corrected XCO2 values, accessible together with all OCO-2 data products through the NASA Goddard Earth Sciences Data and Information Services Center (GES DISC). This work shows that OCO-2 X CO2 observations made between September 2014 and December 2023, after quality filtering and the application of an averaging kernel correction, agree well with coincident TCCON data for all OCO-2 observational modes of land (nadir, glint, target) and ocean (glint). The aggregated, bias-corrected, and quality-filtered absolute average bias values are less than or equal to 0.20 parts per million (ppm) globally for all OCO-2 observation modes, where the biases do not indicate a statistically significant time dependence. The land nadir/glint mode has the lowest bias value of −0.03 ± 0.85 ppm.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Catalytic Oxygen Reduction for Deep O 2 Removal from CO 2 Streams

Streams of CO 2 from various capture processes may contain several impurities of which O 2 is often overlooked as a problematic impurity. Because of its reactivity, the National Energy Technology Laboratory has recommended a stringent limit, less than 10 ppm, for the O 2 level in treated CO 2 products for safe transport, storage, and utilization. Here, in this study, a variety of catalytic oxygen reduction approaches using commercial automotive exhaust emission catalysts are evaluated for O 2 removal from CO 2 streams using different reducing agents, including H 2 , CO, CH 3 OH, and CH 4 . When the amount of reductant added into the feed is carefully controlled, H 2 , CO, or CH 3 OH can effectively remove O 2 from 1.5% to below 10 ppm with a single-reactor design (>99.93% removal efficiency), while simultaneously meeting the impurity limits for other species. With CH 4 as a reductant, it is challenging to simultaneously meet the the O 2 and CO specifications in a single-reactor design because CH 4 also reacts with CO 2 to produce high levels of CO in the stream (at several hundred ppm). A dual-reactor design is developed to enable the use of CH 4 , a readily available and low-cost reductant, for the purification of CO 2 streams to meet the specifications for O 2 and other impurities.

CO2 purification↗
DOE OSTI2024

Continued Evaluation of the Use of a Raman Spectrometer for H-Canyon Dissolver Monitoring

Remote monitoring of dissolver activities in H-Canyon can help operators avoid delays associated with excessive levels of fuel fragments remaining after a run. SRNL has proposed that effective monitoring can be achieved by using a Raman spectrometer to measure NO 2 concentrations in the offgas stream sampled from the facility stack. Prior work (SRNL-STI-2021-00451) measuring the offgas from one dissolution batch of High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) fuel suggested a relationship between %NO 2 levels and fragment height. Herein, we report the results of monitoring and analysis of the dissolution of four batches of Material Test Reactor (MTR) fuel. A rigorous quantitative relationship between %NO 2 measurements and fragment heights could not be established, due to high uncertainties associated with both measurements. Uncertainties with gas measurements are associated with the %NO 2 levels in the offgas being close to the detection limit for the analyzer. Alternative gas measurement strategies are discussed which could improve sensitivity and reduce uncertainty. Limitations to the precision of the probe measurements are also discussed. It is also noted that the offgas is an average of the products from simultaneous dissolution of elements in multiple wells. Detection of a high fragment height level in an individual well may be hindered by low levels in other wells.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2024

Future climate doubles the risk of hydraulic failure in a wet tropical forest

Summary Future climate presents conflicting implications for forest biomass. We evaluate how plant hydraulic traits, elevated CO 2 levels, warming, and changes in precipitation affect forest primary productivity, evapotranspiration, and the risk of hydraulic failure. We used a dynamic vegetation model with plant hydrodynamics (FATES‐HYDRO) to simulate the stand‐level responses to future climate changes in a wet tropical forest in Barro Colorado Island, Panama. We calibrated the model by selecting plant trait assemblages that performed well against observations. These assemblages were run with temperature and precipitation changes for two greenhouse gas emission scenarios (2086–2100: SSP2‐45, SSP5‐85) and two CO 2 levels (contemporary, anticipated). The risk of hydraulic failure is projected to increase from a contemporary rate of 5.7% to 10.1–11.3% under future climate scenarios, and, crucially, elevated CO 2 provided only slight amelioration. By contrast, elevated CO 2 mitigated GPP reductions. We attribute a greater variation in hydraulic failure risk to trait assemblages than to either CO 2 or climate. Our results project forests with both faster growth (through productivity increases) and higher mortality rates (through increasing rates of hydraulic failure) in the neo‐tropics accompanied by certain trait plant assemblages becoming nonviable.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Foreword: Special Section on Multiphysics Aspects of Power Electronics Packaging—Power Die, Power Module, and Converter Level: Part 2

Power electronics are increasingly being used to condition electricity for a wide array of applications, such as transportation (on land, air, and water), data centers, radio frequency, directed energy, wind, solar, and grid-tied applications. Here, to increase power density, performance, efficiency, and reliability-as well as to reduce cost-innovations and developments are needed in the multiphysics packaging of power electronics at a die, module, and converter level. This includes fundamental R&D related to emerging high-voltage, high-temperature, and high-switching-frequency power electronics, packaging materials, thermal materials and interfaces, fluid-based thermal management technologies, reliability, condition monitoring, and prognostics. Latest developments in this area are published as a Special Section on Multiphysics Aspects of Power Electronics Packaging. The first part was published in the May 2024 issue of the IEEE Transactions on Components, Packaging and Manufacturing Technology (Volume 14, Issue 5). The second part of that Special Section is being published in this issue. A brief summary of the papers included in the second part are given below.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2024

Solar Energy Extension Project

The town of Stratford plans to develop and own a 6 kilowatt (kW) solar array on the roof of a municipal-owned public pavilion on the town green. A SolarEdge level 2 EV charging station will be installed at the pavilion to be used by the public. The charging station will have one charging port. The town will install 3 air source heat pumps in the library located adjacent to the pavilion to reduce the use of propane to heat the library. The town will install 4 air source heat pumps in the Town Hall to reduce the use of #2 heating oil to heat the facility. The 6 kW solar array will provide electricity to the library to offset electricity usage, and when an EV plugs into the charging station the solar will provide electricity to the charging station. There is no ground disturbance or ground trenching associated with this project. The 6 kW solar array on the roof of the pavilion will include 20 (390) watt all black panels. A SolarEdge level 2 EV charger will be installed at the pavilion with the 240 V inverter. The solar array will provide electricity to the library and when a vehicle plugs into the EV charger the solar array will switch to power the charger. Any excess electricity that is generated by the array and not used by the library or the EV charger will be fed onto the grid and the town will receive a net metering credit applied towards future consumption. There is no ground disturbance associated with the EV charger or solar array, and the town will install signage to direct the public to the charger. The library will install 2 (18,000) BTU ductless air source heat pumps and 1 (24,000) BTU unit. This will significantly reduce the amount of propane required to heat the library. The Town Hall will install 2 (36,000) BTU ductless air source heat pumps and 2 (9,000) BTU units to reduce the amount of #2 heating oil required to heat the building.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Electro-activated indigos intensify ampere-level CO 2 reduction to CO on silver catalysts

The electrochemical reduction of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) to carbon monoxide (CO) is challenged by a selectivity decline at high current densities. Here we report a class of indigo-based molecular promoters with redox-active CO 2 binding sites to enhance the high-rate conversion of CO 2 to CO on silver (Ag) catalysts. Theoretical calculations and in situ spectroscopy analyses demonstrate that the synergistic effect at the interface of indigo-derived compounds and Ag nanoparticles could activate CO 2 molecules and accelerate the formation of key intermediates (*CO 2 – and *COOH) in the CO pathway. Indigo derivatives with electron-withdrawing groups further reduce the overpotential for CO production upon optimizing the interfacial CO 2 binding affinity. By integrating the molecular design of redox-active centres with the defect engineering of Ag structures, we achieve a Faradaic efficiency for CO exceeding 90% across a current density range of 0.10 − 1.20 A cm –2 . The Ag mass activity toward CO increases to 174 A mg –1 Ag . This work showcases that employing redox-active CO 2 sorbents as surface modification agents is a highly effective strategy to intensify the reactivity of electrochemical CO 2 reduction.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2024

Discerning molecular-level CO 2 adsorption behavior in amine-modified sorbents within a controlled CO 2 /H 2 O environment towards direct air capture

Sorbents designed for direct air capture (DAC) play a crucial role in the pursuit of achieving net-zero carbon dioxide emissions. This study elucidates CO 2 adsorption from dilute, humidified CO 2 streams onto an amine-modified benchmark DAC adsorbent via solid-state NMR spectroscopy. Various NMR techniques, including 1D 1 H MAS, 13 C MAS, 2D 1 H– 13 C HETCOR NMR, and 1 H R 2 and R 1ρ relaxometry reveal the impact of CO 2 partial pressure and H 2 O on CO 2 adsorption behavior. Here we find that CO 2 concentration governs the stepwise formation of ammonium carbamate, carbamic acid, and physisorbed CO 2 , where relative humidity (RH) at a desired low (<400 ppm) CO 2 loading affects total CO 2 uptake. The relaxation studies reveal the cooperative or competitive nature of H 2 O–CO 2 sorption in CO 2 -dilute humid gas, and in particular polymer swelling upon humidification. From those results, we demonstrate that the observed absorption capacity enhancement by humidity is caused by pore opening due to sorbent swelling, and not by bicarbonate formation. This NMR-discerned speciation provides insights into sorption behavior at different RHs in dilute CO 2 gas streams, simulating real-world atmospheric conditions, and governs the design of efficient and adaptable material-process combinations for solid sorbent DAC.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2026

Pilot Heavy-Duty Electric Vehicle Deployment for Anchorage, Alaska, Municipal Solid Waste Collection

Through a grant awarded by the U.S. Department of Energy, the Municipality of Anchorage initiated a pilot program in their Solid Waste Services (SWS) department to add heavy-duty electric trucks to its vehicle fleet. The project involves the purchase and deployment of a Peterbilt 220EV electric box truck and two Peterbilt 520EV heavy-duty electric refuse trucks. The Alaska Center for Energy and Power at the University of Alaska Fairbanks performed data analysis. Data collected include telemetry data from both types of electric trucks, charging data from the 520EV telemetry data and a Level 2 charger, and facility-level electric use data.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Pilot Heavy-Duty Electric Vehicle Deployment for Anchorage, Alaska, Municipal Solid Waste Collection

Through a grant awarded by the U.S. Department of Energy, the Municipality of Anchorage initiated a pilot program in their Solid Waste Services (SWS) department to add heavy-duty electric trucks to its vehicle fleet. The project involves the purchase and deployment of a Peterbilt 220EV electric box truck and two Peterbilt 520EV heavy-duty electric refuse trucks. The Alaska Center for Energy and Power at the University of Alaska Fairbanks performed data analysis. Data collected include telemetry data from both types of electric trucks, charging data from the 520EV telemetry data and a Level 2 charger, and facility-level electric use data.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2024

Species interactions amplify functional group responses to elevated CO 2 and N enrichment in a 24‐year grassland experiment

Abstract Plant functional groups (FGs) differ in their response to global changes, although species within those groups also vary in such responses. Both species and FG responses to global change are likely influenced by species interactions such as inter‐specific competition and facilitation, which are prevalent in species mixtures but not monocultures. As most studies focus on responses of plants growing in either monocultures or mixtures, but rarely both, it remains unclear how interspecific interactions in diverse ecological communities, especially among species in different FGs, modify FG responses to global changes. To address these issues, we leveraged data from a 16‐species, 24‐year perennial grassland experiment to examine plant FG biomass responses to atmospheric CO 2 , and N inputs at different planted diversity. FGs differed in their responses to N and CO 2 treatments in monocultures. Such differences were amplified in mixtures, where N enrichment strongly increased C3 grass success at ambient CO 2 and C4 grass success at elevated CO 2 . Legumes declined with N enrichment in mixtures at both CO 2 levels and increased with elevated CO 2 in the initial years of the experiment. Our results suggest that previous studies that considered responses to global changes in monocultures may underestimate biomass changes in diverse communities where interspecific interactions can amplify responses. Such effects of interspecific interactions on responses of FGs to global change may impact community composition over time and consequently influence ecosystem functions.

Mohanbabu, Neha↗